are there any sources on KE penetration that are avilable to th public. im preetey sure the israeli specs are classified but maybe the american?

All information inregards to Tank projectile performance and armor performance is classified information, the stuff circulating on some of these sites is pure speculation, for what I am involved in I know this to be the case.

December 9th, 2008

SHERMAN

Quote:

I'm curious. Do you know if Turkey (Leo2A4) is one of them?

And what's the difference between a KE projectile and a Tungsten one, other than the fact that KE probably stands for Kinetic Energy and Tungsten is the name of an element?

KE is indeed kinetic energy. tungstan means that the penetrator is made of a mixture of mostly tungstan with some ohter metals. this is to diffrentiate from DU penetrators. pale rider correct me if im wrong.

Quote:

All information inregards to Tank projectile performance and armor performance is classified information, the stuff circulating on some of these sites is pure speculation, for what I am involved in I know this to be the case.

what bugs me is that the stuff online has tanks with armor rating of 900+ mm RHA and yet the stuff on KE rounds has penetration of lets say ~600mm, so the question is are modern MBTs incapable of destroying eachother at 2000 meters? that sounds funny to me that the USA and others would develope KE rounds that cant knock out the opponent...

December 9th, 2008

Pale Rider

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lunatik

I'm curious. Do you know if Turkey (Leo2A4) is one of them?

And what's the difference between a KE projectile and a Tungsten one, other than the fact that KE probably stands for Kinetic Energy and Tungsten is the name of an element?

Turkey uses NATO ammunition for LEO 2A4, but they do have Israeli 120mm projectiles for another tank purchased from Israel.

Yes, KE stands for Kinetic Energy, which is needed for solid core projectiles, you can also think of it as energy and mass.

Germany and a few other countries have gone to Tungsten metals due to the effects of DU on the environment and health issues to humans and animals, this is some of the reason why Germany went to a longer tubed 120mm, they are out of the DU projectile game use now, extra muzzle velocity is needed for better performance using Tungsten projectiles like DM 53 and 63.

--

December 9th, 2008

SHERMAN

pale rider, arnt there tungstan penetrators that can equal DU ones?

December 9th, 2008

Pale Rider

Quote:

Originally Posted by SHERMAN

KE is indeed kinetic energy. tungstan means that the penetrator is made of a mixture of mostly tungstan with some ohter metals. this is to diffrentiate from DU penetrators. pale rider correct me if im wrong.

what bugs me is that the stuff online has tanks with armor rating of 900+ mm RHA and yet the stuff on KE rounds has penetration of lets say ~600mm, so the question is are modern MBTs incapable of destroying eachother at 2000 meters? that sounds funny to me that the USA and others would develope KE rounds that cant knock out the opponent...

Yes you are correct, there is some other metals added to help strengthen Tungsten projectiles, nickel and copper were used in earlier versions of Tungsten projectiles, but we were experiencing major bending and mushrooming of the projectiles during impact until a newer process was discovered by the U.S and Germany.

Yes, some of this stuff is a bit amusing, even the armor on a U.S M60A1 is still classified information and that was designed when.

December 9th, 2008

Pale Rider

Quote:

Originally Posted by SHERMAN

pale rider, arnt there tungstan penetrators that can equal DU ones?

Sorry but that is classified information,

But one must wonder why there are still countries out there that do not want to switch away from DU projectiles, the tendancy for Tungsten to still bend while tackling certain ERA tiles could be a issue at certain ranges.

December 9th, 2008

Rorke

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pale Rider

At the current time L55 muzzle velocity doesn`t matter a hill of beans for the Americans or Israelis, both have capable ammunition that will perform just as good as DM 63 if not better, now why did the Germans go to a longer tube. You are making statements on subjects that you do not have a clue about.

.

@Pale Rider from now on i will back up mystatements and demand that you back up your own with sources, you are making stuff up and pulling facts from your arse which pisses me off to no end.

As for L55 the longer barrel provides increased muzzle velocity, also as Sherman mentioned the gun is longer lived.

As for Merkava no we have no figure on the armor but we do have figures on Leclerc, Leo and Abrams and unless Israel has aliens helping them with their tech their tank is not better since they use the same pool of technology and still their tank is lighter which in this case translates into less armor.

December 9th, 2008

SHERMAN

rorke opsec keeps me from telling you why you are wrong.

December 9th, 2008

Rorke

Quote:

Originally Posted by SHERMAN

rorke opsec keeps me from telling you why you are wrong.

Sherman just for the future, i'm not going to dick wave with captain make-believe since by making stuff up he ensured a permanent place on my shitlist but i expected more of you.

Everyone including me can post "you're wrong but security prevents me from telling why" if you cant name the reasons you dont have the reasons please dont use opsec as a cop out.

December 9th, 2008

SHERMAN

seeing as ive been on this forum for around 4 years, i have experience with the merkava, and we all know what opsec is, if i tell you a post you made has an inherent flaw in it you have 2 options: